The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Storytelling Organization: A Study of Story Performance in an Office- Supply Firm
Abstract
This paper reports on a participant-observation study in a large office-supply firm of how people perform stories to make sense of events, introduce change, and gain political advantage during their conversations. The story was not found to be a highly agreed-upon text, told from beginning to end, as it has been studied in most prior story research. Rather, the stories were dynamic, varied by context, and were sometimes terse, requiring the hearer to fill in silently major chunks of story line, context, and implication. Stories were frequently challenged, reinterpreted, and revised by the hearers as they unfolded in conversation. The paper supports a theory of organization as a collective storytelling system in which the performance of stories is a key part of members’ sense making and a means to allow them to supplement individual memories with institutional memory.*
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017) · Aldine (Routledge reprint) · doi:10.4324/9780203793206 · Cited by 25,789
A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974) · Language · doi:10.2307/412243 · Cited by 11,350
Narration as a human communication paradigm: The case of public moral argument
Fisher, W. R. (1984) · Communication Monographs · doi:10.1080/03637758409390180 · Cited by 1,807 · cited 1×
“Third, terse telling can be a power strategy of purposeful mystification (Fisher, 1984) or tactical ambiguity.”
Background
Cited by
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE AND DEVELOPMENT
Weick, K. E., & Quinn, R. E. (1999) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.361 · Cited by 2,829
Sensemaking in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward
Maitlis, S., & Christianson, M. (2014) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2014.873177 · Cited by 1,764
Media, Tasks, and Communication Processes: A Theory of Media Synchronicity1
Dennis, A. R., Fuller, R. M., & Valacich, J. S. (2008) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148857 · Cited by 1,511
Selves Creating Stories Creating Selves: A Process Model of Self-Development
McLean, K. C., Pasupathi, M., & Pals, J. L. (2007) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/1088868307301034 · Cited by 1,065
McLean, K. C., & Syed, M. (2015) · Human Development · doi:10.1159/000445817 · Cited by 743
Metadata
- Authors
- Boje, D. M.
- Venue
- Administrative Science Quarterly
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1991-03
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 106
- ISSN
- 0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2038223765
- Cited by
- 1,722
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 23.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Storytelling Organization: A Study of Story Performance in an Office- Supply Firm. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2393432
- The paper
- Boje, D. M. (1991). The Storytelling Organization: A Study of Story Performance in an Office- Supply Firm. Administrative Science Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393432
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
